§ The result
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) leads Clevry by 12 points.
Juicebox (PeopleGPT), filed under Sourcing, comes out 12 points above Clevry, filed under Assessment: 57 against 45 under rubric v1.0. The 7 criteria split 4 to 1 in favour of Juicebox (PeopleGPT), with 2 level: Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is ahead on Bias Audit Transparency and Clevry on Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Clevry 38, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84 — and at an 18% weight it carries 68% of the weighted advantage Juicebox (PeopleGPT) holds across the 4 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Clevry
Clevry is a UK psychometric assessment platform offering norm-referenced personality questionnaires, cognitive ability tests and situational judgement tests, plus recorded one-way video interviews, an interview builder, a skills-first ATS and an AI tool that maps job ads onto its personality scale library.
Vendor profile
Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Juicebox (PeopleGPT) is an AI talent-sourcing search engine that lets recruiters find, rank, and reach candidates across 800M+ public profiles using natural-language queries instead of Boolean search, with an "Autopilot" agent that scores and ranks profiles against job criteria.
§ The record
Clevry is filed under Assessment AI, Juicebox (PeopleGPT) under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: ATS-integrated.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act, Illinois HB 3773 and Colorado AI Act. Only Clevry is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Clevry | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 1991 | 2022 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 63% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Clevry 38 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 84
8.3 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 86% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Clevry 30 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 55
3.0 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
12% weight · 93% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Clevry 58 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 50
1.0 weighted points to Clevry
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Clevry 30 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 35
0.8 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
15% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Clevry 55 · Juicebox (PeopleGPT) 56
0.1 weighted points to Juicebox (PeopleGPT)
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -11.2 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 13.1 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -12 beside that -11.2.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Clevry minus Juicebox (PeopleGPT).
| Category | Weight | Clevry | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 52 | 52 | - | - |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 38 | 84 | -46 | -8.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 30 | 35 | -5 | -0.8 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 56 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 58 | 50 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 55 | -25 | -3.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 60 | - | - |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 57 (F) | -12 | -11.2 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Clevry | Juicebox (PeopleGPT) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 7 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 7 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 7 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on a separate domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 39 | 5 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain | 12 | 4 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Clevry has 44 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 39 with a source URL, 5 documented absences; Juicebox (PeopleGPT) has 16 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 4 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Clevry and Juicebox (PeopleGPT) sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 44 for Clevry, across 2 distinct source domains, and 16 for Juicebox (PeopleGPT), across 4 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Clevry last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Juicebox (PeopleGPT) last reviewed
- June 7, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next